Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T04:11:27.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

TYRANNY DENIED: CHARLES I, ATTORNEY GENERAL HEATH, AND THE FIVE KNIGHTS' CASE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1999

MARK KISHLANSKY
Affiliation:
Harvard University

Abstract

This article exonerates Charles I and Attorney General Sir Robert Heath from charges that they tampered with the records of the court of King's Bench in the Five Knights' Case. It refutes allegations made by John Selden in the parliament of 1628 and repeated by modern historians. Selden's attack on Heath and the king's government was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of King's Bench enrolments and a radical view of the crown's intentions in imprisoning loan resisters. The view that Charles was attempting to establish the prerogative right to imprison opponents without remedy at common law has no basis in either the arguments presented during the Five Knights' Case or the king's behaviour both before and during the parliament. By accepting the most radical critique of Caroline government at face value, historians have concluded that Charles was attempting to establish a ‘legal tyranny’. This article rejects these views.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author would like to thank Tom Cogswell, John Guy, Peter Lake, John Morrill, Kevin Sharpe, and David Smith for their comments on early drafts of this essay and Paul Halliday and Catherine Patterson for discussions on King's Bench procedure.